TV Show Billions caving to PC bull5hit.

Has anyone else been watching this season? I just want to watch a show about a US Attorney battling a hedge fund run by a charismatic billionaire. Is there really a need to put in a non-gender defining character? This is why people hate Hollywood, I just want to be entertained for an hour, stop trying to push PC liberal bullshit down my throat.

I wanted to watch that show too....Guess it's out. I'm tired of this nonsense. At least that When We Rise show tanked.

Maybe all conservatives should come out as non-binary, then it won't be the cool new fad anymore.

Mit - I wanted to watch that show too....Guess it's out. I'm tired of this nonsense. At least that When We Rise show tanked.

The first season is actually pretty good.

Onikage - Maybe all conservatives should come out as non-binary, then it won't be the cool new fad anymore.

I'll starting watching it fully tucked if that helps 

Pugilist82 -
Mit - I wanted to watch that show too....Guess it's out. I'm tired of this nonsense. At least that When We Rise show tanked.

The first season is actually pretty good.

Damn good. DVRing the new shit. Not happy about the PC bullshit 

Was going to check this show out. Think ill pass

Yeah, I thought it was odd but "it" plays "it's" role pretty well.

 

Disclaimer: I haven't watched this weeks episode yet, so if "it" did something fucked don't hold it against me. 

OP needs a safe space

I was pissed they added "Taylor" to the show. More PC bullshit. 

However, once you get past the character it's still a pretty good show. I just keep hoping Dollar Bill or Wags takes "it" down a peg or two. 

And Maggie Siff is SO sexy. 

Actually it's the opposite....The character was called "it" or "that" or "thing" several Times during the latest episode. .im loosely quoting here but one line was"you're giving my fucking spot to that thing!?"..That seems like it would piss off PC people more

Pugilist82 - Has anyone else been watching this season? I just want to watch a show about a US Attorney battling a hedge fund run by a charismatic billionaire. Is there really a need to put in a non-gender defining character? This is why people hate Hollywood, I just want to be entertained for an hour, stop trying to push PC liberal bullshit down my throat.

ive never watched the show but they did the same thing to house of cards on netflix. its like as soon as a show gains attention the liberals have to put their agenda into it front and center.

JimmersonzGlove - OP needs a safe space
lol

GS27 - Actually it's the opposite....The character was called "it" or "that" or "thing" several Times during the latest episode. .im loosely quoting here but one line was"you're giving my fucking spot to that thing!?"..That seems like it would piss off PC people more

The remarks were only acceptable is to show how awful white men are to "it". Even then, the protagonist quickly puts them in their place.

My biggest problem with the whole thing is that even if they wanted to put in a character that is a savant at well... everything, there is no reason to make make the character identify as non-gender. It doesn't advance the plot even a little bit and is there purely for political reasons.

I actually like the gender neutral character now. In the beginning I thought they were pushing some agenda, but I actually like the scenes between Axe and "it" and the poker episode was pretty good.

Cutty McButts - 
JimmersonzGlove - OP needs a safe space
lol

Exactly, I don't think this dude pays attention to who's demanding safe spaces.

SallymeetsHarrySack - I actually like the gender neutral character now. In the beginning I thought they were pushing some agenda, but I actually like the scenes between Axe and "it" and the poker episode was pretty good.

My point is, how does making her gender neutral advance the plot at all? They could have just as easily made her a nerdy girl or nerdy guy. Hell, they could have even used the same exact actress, but left out the political shit that has nothing to do with the rest of the show.

Pugilist82 - 
GS27 - Actually it's the opposite....The character was called "it" or "that" or "thing" several Times during the latest episode. .im loosely quoting here but one line was"you're giving my fucking spot to that thing!?"..That seems like it would piss off PC people more

The remarks were only acceptable is to show how awful white men are to "it". Even then, the protagonist quickly puts them in their place.

My biggest problem with the whole thing is that even if they wanted to put in a character that is a savant at well... everything, there is no reason to make make the character identify as non-gender. It doesn't advance the plot even a little bit and is there purely for political reasons.

I completely disagree, I have read a study that links lesbianism and "tomboyism" in women with Asperger's in much higher percentages than women without Asperger's.


http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087961

I actually like the new character. Taylor is the only person at Axe's firm that doesn't fit the 'horny greedy alpha-bro' venture capitalist stereotype. Even the new psychiatrist is an idiot dude-bro. I find her/his completely different mindset and motivations and the way that Axe responds to him/her to be very interesting. Taylor is way more interesting than Dollar Bill or Wags or Mafee or any of the other idiots at Axe capital.

SallymeetsHarrySack - 
Pugilist82 - 
GS27 - Actually it's the opposite....The character was called "it" or "that" or "thing" several Times during the latest episode. .im loosely quoting here but one line was"you're giving my fucking spot to that thing!?"..That seems like it would piss off PC people more

The remarks were only acceptable is to show how awful white men are to "it". Even then, the protagonist quickly puts them in their place.

My biggest problem with the whole thing is that even if they wanted to put in a character that is a savant at well... everything, there is no reason to make make the character identify as non-gender. It doesn't advance the plot even a little bit and is there purely for political reasons.

I completely disagree, I have read a study that links lesbianism and "tomboyism" in women with Asperger's in much higher percentages than women without Asperger's.


http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087961

The character does not have Asperger's. Even if she did, Asperger's is not mutually exclusive to lesbians and "tomboys", they just are in higher percentages. Lastly, she is not supposed to be a lesbian or tomboy, she is supposed to have "no gender".